Palm Beach Guardianship Litigation: Who is an Interested Person?

Pursuant to Florida guardianship law, what are my rights? Can I participate in a Florida guardianship proceeding for my spouse, mom, or dad? Can I participate in a guardianship proceeding of anyone? Who has the ability to go into a probate court West Palm Beach and have a say in someone’s guardianship proceeding?  Anyone who is involved in a guardianship matter in Florida, should read St. Pete v. Osorio-Khor.

What are my rights in Florida guardianship litigation?

• Are you an interested party to a guardianship proceeding?
• Do you have enough connection with the person who is the subject of a guardianship matter that you are entitled to participate in the guardianship hearing?
• A probate judge West Palm Beach will determine if you are an interested person.
• The judge will consider your relationship with the person who is subject to a guardianship, and will be very fact dependent.
• If you are an interested person, and you have been denied an opportunity to participate in a family member’s guardianship trial, what are your rights?
• You may have rights in probate court, and you may also have rights to Florida guardianship appeal.
• If you are involved in a Florida guardianship matter, and your probate litigator is telling you that the court isn’t letting you participate, you should figure out what your rights are.
• Check out this recent appeal out of the Fourth DCA where the court found that the appellee was not an interested person and did not have standing.

St. Peter v. Osorio-Kohr

• This was an “appeal in a guardianship proceeding from the trial court’s order denying appellant’s motion for attorney’s fees pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes against appellee Karlene Osorio-Kohr.”
• Guardianship litigation is becoming more and more common in West Palm Beach and surrounding cities.
• Here the appellant requested attorney’s fees pursuant to section 57.105 after the trial court determined that the appellee did not have standing in the matter.
• The Fourth DCA affirmed the “trial court’s ruling denying the motion for attorney’s fees under section 57.105, Florida Statutes (2014), based on our conclusion that Khor’s removal position was not “frivolous” such that it was “completely withot merit in law and cannot be supported by a reasonable argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing law.”
• Here, the appellee was not determined to be an interested person.
• How come?
• To read the entire Fourth DCA guardianship appeal, click here.